How an A-2 should fit - Original 1756 no name, and no balloons in sight...

[MightyEighth]

An original HH no name 1756, size 38 on a size 38 mannequin, with 24" back and sleeves.

Pretty skinny eh?

More like a thick leather shirt than a jacket... tuck the knits in your pants, throw a tie under the collar, and off to the office

 

[Seb Lucas]

Slim or blousy? I think the way the question is expressed will lend itself to people voting slim. Blousy sounds awful and slim sounds, well, desirable. You could also have written - How should it fit skin-tight or looser? and it would have had the same affect on votes in reverse. As we've seen from so many period photos there was no original fit. I prefer them to have a looser look, but blousy... not so much.

 

[rocketeer]

Does the mannequin have a military fit(as in athletically fit) shape or is it just a shop mannequin? Thats an observation rather than a question.
I bought a bunch of mannequins and sold the lot to jacket collectors, they were all modern shop dummies so had that perfect body except one that had a kind of barrel chest. Storred my B3 on it till someone offered me some good £££ for it.

 

[MightyEighth]

Slim or blousy? I think the way the question is expressed will lend itself to people voting slim. Blousy sounds awful and slim sounds, well, desirable. You could also have written - How should it fit skin-tight or looser? and it would have had the same affect on votes in reverse. As we've seen from so many period photos there was no original fit. I prefer them to have a looser look, but blousy... not so much.

I know what you are saying, however the word blousy would technically be correct for the looser fit, as they blouse around the edges/knits etc. I don't think blousy has negative connotations, unless based on personal taste and preference.

Agree there was no one original fit, but there were original fits per contract, of which the 1756 is certainly my favourite original fit that I have seen.

 

[MightyEighth]

I know what you are saying, however the word blousy would technically be correct for the looser fit, as they blouse around the edges/knits etc. I don't think blousy has negative connotations, unless based on personal taste and preference.

Agree there was no one original fit, but there were original fits per contract, of which the 1756 is certainly my favourite original fit that I have seen.

I don't think it matters too much what type of mannequin it is in this instance - its clearly a very slim jacket.

 

[Doctor Damage]

I know what you are saying, however the word blousy would technically be correct for the looser fit, as they blouse around the edges/knits etc. I don't think blousy has negative connotations, unless based on personal taste and preference.

It's worth pointing out that WWII paratroopers bloused their pants over their jump boots!

 

[MightyEighth]

It's worth pointing out that WWII paratroopers bloused their pants over their jump boots!

Indeed

 

[Seb Lucas]

I know what you are saying, however the word blousy would technically be correct for the looser fit, as they blouse around the edges/knits etc. I don't think blousy has negative connotations, unless based on personal taste and preference.

Agree there was no one original fit, but there were original fits per contract, of which the 1756 is certainly my favourite original fit that I have seen.

Nevertheless, I reckon you'll find very few people ever on here will ask for a "blousy" fit. But many will ask for a looser one.

 

[tonypaj]

The jacket in the OP is portrayed in the picture as modern hipster stuff. First, put proper pants there if you want something "original". Second, allow stuff to be worn with it, apart from a t-shirt. And I guess 38 from back then is not 38 from now.

Anyway, it might not be a surprise, I prefer to err on the loose side, better blousy than that slim.

 

[devilish]

Most of the regulars here will know these photos very well but if you want to see the range of fits that were around during the war then these give you a pretty good idea. http://www.goodwearleather.com/pages/links.html Just scroll down and check out the Doolittle crew pictures. Virtually no two are alike and there are plenty more links on JC's site that illustrate the same thing.

 

[ProteinNerd]

Different people prefer different types of fit these days, why is it so hard to imagine it was the same back then?

Expecting there is a "right" fit and a "wrong" fit is ludicrous, sure there may be prevailing trends of the time but not everyone follows them. How many of you are wearing skinny jeans these day, they are apparently the current fashionable way to wear jeans so doesn't that make you wrong if you aren't wearing them?

 

[MightyEighth]

Nice pic. None of these look particularly loose or overly slim, just nice. Indeed each to their own.

 

[Marv]

Nice pic. None of these look particularly loose or overly slim, just nice. Indeed each to their own.


View attachment 11302

Exactly, a comfortable fit which is probably what most aircrew preferred from a piece of utility kit.......same then as it is now I would guess.

 

[Edward]

Ideally, I prefer a A2 to fit like a good Harrington. Looser than a thirties style halfbelt, but not big enough for a sweater underneath. If it's cold enough out to necessitate a sweater, it's not A2 weather. Purely personal preference, though.

 

[MightyEighth]

Ideally, I prefer a A2 to fit like a good Harrington. Looser than a thirties style halfbelt, but not big enough for a sweater underneath. If it's cold enough out to necessitate a sweater, it's not A2 weather. Purely personal preference, though.

Totally agree. That's why I retire my A-2 to storage in the Autumn.

The officers and aircrew that wore their A-2 on flights, without their B3, must have been bloody freezing.

 

[Justhandguns]

That is why I have two sizes for my A-2s, 38 for a tight slim fit, and 40 for a more comfy kind of wearing, especially with a thicker sweater underneath.

The problem for the A-2 is always the one piece back where it bulges at waist level. Some patterns also have some pretty generous cut at the sleeves which makes them look like an 80s' jacket (in a fashion's sense). I think the jacket in the photo looks like an excellent fit.

 

[MightyEighth]

That is why I have two sizes for my A-2s, 38 for a tight slim fit, and 40 for a more comfy kind of wearing, especially with a thicker sweater underneath.

The problem for the A-2 is always the one piece back where it bulges at waist level. Some patterns also have some pretty generous cut at the sleeves which makes them look like an 80s' jacket (in a fashion's sense). I think the jacket in the photo looks like an excellent fit.

Yeah, that's the issue I find. I am too slim for anything other than a very fitted A-2 - I get swamped in any looser fit, especially with thicker hides, which bellow out even more (due to strength of hide) and I end up looking 100ibs heavier than I actually am!

 

[TXFlyGuy]

Slim vs. Blousy? I think "tailored" would be the appropriate nomenclature for the subject at hand. I like a jacket when it looks like it was custom tailored for the individual. A 40R, or a 42R, off the rack, most often will do this for me.

 

[Edward]

Totally agree. That's why I retire my A-2 to storage in the Autumn.

The officers and aircrew that wore their A-2 on flights, without their B3, must have been bloody freezing.

Yes, it would be interesting to know how often, outside Hollywood films, they really flew wearing an A2. I suspect it wasn't often, if at all (which, of course, would also help explain how so many have survived intact...).

Now I think about it, there is that story of painting jackets being banned after Goebbels found some mileage in some USAAF boys captured after having been shot down wearing jackets with "Murder Inc" on them. That said, while they seem to have been the most common canvas, A2s were far from the only jackets to have been painted...

 

[thor]

When it comes to aircrew wearing their A-2's there seems to be more of a focus on B-17 and B-24 bomber crews in the ETO. Not all USAAF aircrew flew the heavies at 20,000 feet; the medium bomber crews at lower altitudes or in milder climates and fighter pilots doing low-level sorties probably got quite a bit of use from their A-2 jackets.